Case Summary
The case revolved around the event when more than 60% of the voters of Kansas City and Wyandotte County voted in favor of consolidation of the governments of the city and the county. The consolidation resulted in a formation of the unified city or county structures which positioned the reform candidates into the positions of administrators, mayor, and councilors of the Unified government board, i.e., UGB. The decision of consolidation was the first decision ever as it passed on the first voting and by a wide margin as well. It was not the first city-county consolidation, New Orleans was the one, and however, with hundreds of rejected consolidation requests in the country, the margin of success was astonishing.
The case weighs on several reasons as the supporting cause for consolidation. The higher tax rates, declining incomes, loss of population, and the demanding need for the improved service provision made it happen. The Reform coalition persuaded the voters into believing that the long-term fiscal depression faced by the city will dissolve and can be more effectively managed with a consolidated structure of government. Thus, it implied that major reforms to the county budget would be needed to manage the fiscal stress.
The efficient presentation of the arguments in favor of consolidation through the effectiveness, efficiency, equity, and accountability made it easier to be understood by voters. The case illustrates a perfect example of providing managed, planned, and effective foundation for the Consolidation reforms of Counties or cities for the betterment of the structural, financial, operational, and governmental efficiency, effectiveness, equity, and accountability.
Question 1-What were of the symptoms of fiscal distress in WyCo/KCK? Why did the image problems exacerbate these?
The symptoms of the fiscal stress presented in the case which was evident in the city and county laid the foundation for the consolidation of the city and county. The county of Wyandotte was facing the highest property taxes in the entire state of Kansas. Furthermore, the KCK was also facing the highest property taxes in the metropolitan region of Kansas City. Resulting from this, the residents and owners of the property of the KCK paid about 32% more in taxes as compared to the other cities of Kansas. It was also one of the reasons that businesses and families were moving from the city into the cities with lower property tax rates. The loss of population had gone to about 2000 residents moving each year out of the city. The property taxes had also weakened the position of business losing the competitive edge of the city. The decline in the foreign aid only worsened it. The depth of fiscal stress can be witnessed by the fact that in 1996, the KCK destroyed about 865 more houses than it made. KCK and Wyandotte both were yielding the lowest per capita income in the state. About 45% of the increase was recorded in the residents who were receiving food stamps. The unemployment rate at 6% was also the highest in the entire state. These symptoms exacerbated an image of favoritism, machine political and urban decay (Hildreth, 2003).
Question 2-What arguments did the consolidation reform commission use to persuade voters that consolidation would improve the fiscal health of the economy?
The consolidation reform commission provided many convincing arguments to persuade the voters for the consolidation. These arguments based on the idea that the main city should be the sole governing unit and should be the only service provider for the whole metropolitan area. It was based on the argument that the increased size of the urban government will yield increased public services, increased responsibility, and increased confidence in citizens on their ability to influence the policy. The proponents argued that the presence of a large number of independent jurisdictions under a single metropolitan area creates a problem. They argued that the consolidation will aid the county when federal aid is diminishing through its economies of scale, increasing effectiveness, equity, efficiency, and accountability. They argued that consolidation would reduce the duplication of the services and allocate these resources to areas most desirable. Avoiding duplicate services like zoning, planning, building inspections would eliminate citizen confusion on the jurisdiction ensuring accountability. It also argued that the consolidation would force the suburban’s to help pay for the central cities which they have abandoned. The consolidation will equate the income inequalities and racial segregation. Another most convincing aspect was the reformation of the budget format and inclusion of it into the county budget (Hildreth, 2003).
Question 3-In your opinion, which core value of public administration (efficiency, effectiveness, accountability, or equity) was most influential in persuading voters to approve consolidation?
In my point of view, the core value of public administration, which convinced and persuaded the voters to vote in favor of the consolidation of the county and the city was accountability. As mentioned earlier, the reputation of the county that a job in the county can be only getting by having strong connections showed the problems in the accountability of the system. The consolidation reforms were focused on reforming the budgeting and the personnel system of the county to tackle this problem. The reformation of the budget and the personnel system lead the county and city to better accountability in the government system and the citizen’s taxpayer money.
Question 4-In what ways do budget formats promote or diminish accountability in this case? Are there alternative to budget reform that would also bring greater accountability to the county government?
The budget formats tell the priorities of the elected officials. The format of the budget is an important factor which influences the aim of the budget deliberations intended. The KCK budget format which is program budget had received the Award for Distinguish budget from the GFOA. It met the criteria of financial accountability, operations measurement, communications, and policy content. It was the format which was used for the consolidation of the two budgets. The functions depicted in the consolidated government budgets showed the emphases on the transparency and accountability of each function (Hildreth, 2003).
Reference
Hildreth, W. B. (2003). Case Studies in Public Budgeting and Financial Management, Revised and Expanded. CRC Press.
+447462439809